On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:05:27PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Joe, > > (CC'ing Greg and adding context for easier understanding) > > On Thursday, 14 December 2017 20:54:39 EET Joe Perches wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 20:37 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Thursday, 14 December 2017 20:32:20 EET Joe Perches wrote: > > >> On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 20:28 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > >>> On Thursday, 14 December 2017 19:05:27 EET Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > >>>> Em Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:05:37 +0530 Dhaval Shah escreveu: > > >>>>> SPDX-License-Identifier is used for the Xilinx Video IP and > > >>>>> related drivers. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Dhaval Shah <dhaval23031987@xxxxxxxxx> > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi Dhaval, > > >>>> > > >>>> You're not listed as one of the Xilinx driver maintainers. I'm afraid > > >>>> that, without their explicit acks, sent to the ML, I can't accept a > > >>>> patch touching at the driver's license tags. > > >>> > > >>> The patch doesn't change the license, I don't see why it would cause > > >>> any issue. Greg isn't listed as the maintainer or copyright holder of > > >>> any of the 10k+ files to which he added an SPDX license header in the > > >>> last kernel release. > > >> Adding a comment line that describes an implicit or > > >> explicit license is different than removing the license > > >> text itself. > > > > > > The SPDX license header is meant to be equivalent to the license text. > > > > I understand that. > > At a minimum, removing BSD license text is undesirable > > as that license states: > > > > * * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright > > * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. > > etc... > > But this patch only removes the following text: > > - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > - * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as > - * published by the Free Software Foundation. > > and replaces it by the corresponding SPDX header. > > > > The only reason why the large SPDX patch didn't touch the whole kernel in > > > one go was that it was easier to split in in multiple chunks. > > > > Not really, it was scripted. > > But still manually reviewed as far as I know. > > > > This is no different than not including the full GPL license in every > > > header file but only pointing to it through its name and reference, as > > > every kernel source file does. > > > > Not every kernel source file had a license text > > or a reference to another license file. > > Correct, but the files touched by this patch do. > > This issue is in no way specific to linux-media and should be decided upon at > the top level, not on a per-subsystem basis. Greg, could you comment on this ? Comment on what exactly? I don't understand the problem here, care to summarize it? thanks, greg k-h
